Search Results

Search found 9215 results on 369 pages for 'double pointers'.

Page 8/369 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Pointers and Addresses in C

    - by Mohit
    #include "stdio.h" main() { int i=3,*x; float j=1.5,*y; char k='c',*z; x=&i; y=&j; z=&k; printf("\nAddress of x= %u",x); printf("\nAddress of y= %u",y); printf("\nAddress of z= %u",z); x++; y++;y++;y++;y++; z++; printf("\nNew Address of x= %u",x); printf("\nNew Address of y= %u",y); printf("\nNew Address of z= %u",z); printf("\nNew Value of i= %d",i); printf("\nNew Value of j= %f",j); printf("\nNew Value of k= %c\n",k); } Output: Address of x= 3219901868 Address of y= 3219901860 Address of z= 3219901875 New Address of x= 3219901872 New Address of y= 3219901876 New Address of z= 3219901876 New Value of i= 3 New Value of j= 1.500000 New Value of k= c The new address of variable y and z are same. How can two variables have same address and et have different values? Note: I used gcc compiler on Ubuntu 9.04

    Read the article

  • list of pointers in c++

    - by pavlos
    What i want to do is for (list<cPacket *>::iterator i = cache.begin(); i != cache.end(); i++){ if( strcmp(i->getName(),id) == 0 ){ return true; } } where getName is function of the class cPacket, But it does not work, i tries also i.operator->()->getName(), and again nothing. Can anybody help me?

    Read the article

  • Sort a list of pointers.

    - by YuppieNetworking
    Hello all, Once again I find myself failing at some really simple task in C++. Sometimes I wish I could de-learn all I know from OO in java, since my problems usually start by thinking like Java. Anyways, I have a std::list<BaseObject*> that I want to sort. Let's say that BaseObject is: class BaseObject { protected: int id; public: BaseObject(int i) : id(i) {}; virtual ~BaseObject() {}; }; I can sort the list of pointer to BaseObject with a comparator struct: struct Comparator { bool operator()(const BaseObject* o1, const BaseObject* o2) const { return o1->id < o2->id; } }; And it would look like this: std::list<BaseObject*> mylist; mylist.push_back(new BaseObject(1)); mylist.push_back(new BaseObject(2)); // ... mylist.sort(Comparator()); // intentionally omitted deletes and exception handling Until here, everything is a-ok. However, I introduced some derived classes: class Child : public BaseObject { protected: int var; public: Child(int id1, int n) : BaseObject(id1), var(n) {}; virtual ~Child() {}; }; class GrandChild : public Child { public: GrandChild(int id1, int n) : Child(id1,n) {}; virtual ~GrandChild() {}; }; So now I would like to sort following the following rules: For any Child object c and BaseObject b, b<c To compare BaseObject objects, use its ids, as before. To compare Child objects, compare its vars. If they are equal, fallback to rule 2. GrandChild objects should fallback to the Child behavior (rule 3). I initially thought that I could probably do some casts in Comparator. However, this casts away constness. Then I thought that probably I could compare typeids, but then everything looked messy and it is not even correct. How could I implement this sort, still using list<BaseObject*>::sort ? Thank you

    Read the article

  • A few questions about char pointers.

    - by m4design
    1- How does this work: char *ptr = "hi"; Now the compiler will put this string in the memory (I'm guessing the stack), and create a pointer to it? Is this is how it works? 2- Also if it is created locally in a function, when the function returns will the memory occupied by the string be freed? 3- Last but not least, why is this not allowed: ptr[0] = 'H'; ?

    Read the article

  • C++ Array of pointers: delete or delete []?

    - by Jasper
    Cosider the following code: class Foo { Monster* monsters[6]; Foo() { for (int i = 0; i < 6; i++) { monsters[i] = new Monster(); } } virtual ~Foo(); } What is the correct destructor? this: Foo::~Foo() { delete [] monsters; } or this: Foo::~Foo() { for (int i = 0; i < 6; i++) { delete monsters[i]; } } I currently have the uppermost constructor and everything is working okey, but of course I cannot see if it happens to be leaking... Personally, I think the second version is much more logical considering what I am doing. Anyway, what is the "proper" way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Templates, Function Pointers and C++0x

    - by user328543
    One of my personal experiments to understand some of the C++0x features: I'm trying to pass a function pointer to a template function to execute. Eventually the execution is supposed to happen in a different thread. But with all the different types of functions, I can't get the templates to work. #include `<functional`> int foo(void) {return 2;} class bar { public: int operator() (void) {return 4;}; int something(int a) {return a;}; }; template <class C> int func(C&& c) { //typedef typename std::result_of< C() >::type result_type; typedef typename std::conditional< std::is_pointer< C >::value, std::result_of< C() >::type, std::conditional< std::is_object< C >::value, std::result_of< typename C::operator() >::type, void> >::type result_type; result_type result = c(); return result; } int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { // call with a function pointer func(foo); // call with a member function bar b; func(b); // call with a bind expression func(std::bind(&bar::something, b, 42)); // call with a lambda expression func( [](void)->int {return 12;} ); return 0; } The result_of template alone doesn't seem to be able to find the operator() in class bar and the clunky conditional I created doesn't compile. Any ideas? Will I have additional problems with const functions?

    Read the article

  • Pointers in For loops

    - by Bobby
    Quick question: I am a C# guy debugging a C++ app so I am not used to memory management. In the following code: for(int i = 0; i < TlmMsgDB.CMTGetTelemMsgDBCount(); i++) { CMTTelemetryMsgCls* telm = TlmMsgDB.CMTGetTelemetryMsg(i); CMT_SINT32_Tdef id = telm->CMTGetPackingMapID(); ManualScheduleTables.SetManualMsg(i,id); ManualScheduleTables.SetManExec(i,false); } Am I leaking memory every iteration b/c of CMTTelemetryMsgCls* telm = TlmMsgDB.CMTGetTelemetryMsg(i);? The "CMTGetTelemetryMsg(int)" method returns a pointer. Do I have to "delete telm;" at the end of each iteration?

    Read the article

  • How to use pointers and pointer aritmetic

    - by booby
    : error C2064: term does not evaluate to a function taking 1 arguments : error C2227: left of '-name' must point to class/struct/union/generic type how do i fix this so this error doesn't happen for(int index = 0; index < (numStudents); index++) { if (student(index + 1)->score >= 90 ) student(index + 1)->grade = 'A'; else if (student(index + 1)->score >= 80 ) student(index + 1)->grade = 'B'; else if (student(index + 1)->score >= 70 ) student(index + 1)->grade = 'C'; else if (student(index + 1)->score >= 60 ) student(index + 1)->grade = 'D'; else student(index + 1)->grade = 'F'; }

    Read the article

  • Assign pointers in objective C

    - by Tattat
    -(id)setBigObject:(BigObject *)abc{ self.wl = abc; abc.smallObject = self.smallObject; } I have a abc, which is a big Object, when the user pass the bigObject, abc. I assign to my wl value, so , I write "self.wl = abc;", but I want my smallObject assign to the abc's smallObject, so, I do "abc.smallObject = self.smallObject; " So, when I edit the smallObject in self, it will also changed in the abc's also? Am I right?

    Read the article

  • typedef to store pointers in C

    - by seriouslion
    The Size of pointer depends on the arch of the machine. So sizeof(int*)=sizeof(int) or sizeof(int*)=sizeof(long int) I want to have a custom data type which is either int or long int depending on the size of pointer. I tried to use macro #if, but the condition for macros does not allow sizeof operator. Also when using if-else, typedef is limited to the scope of if. if((sizeof(int)==sizeof(int *)){ typedef int ptrtype; } else{ typedef long int ptrtype; } //ptrtype not avialble here Is there any way to define ptrtype globally?

    Read the article

  • Pointers in C with binary file

    - by darkie15
    Hi All, I am reading the contents of the file using fread into an char array. But I am not sure why it is not getting printed in the output. Here is the code: void getInfo(FILE* inputFile) { char chunk[4]; int liIndex; for (liIndex = 0 ; liIndex < 4 ; liIndex++) { fread(chunk, sizeof(char), 4, inputFile); } printf("\n chunk %s", chunk); } Output prints nothing at all. Where am I going wrong? Regards , darkie

    Read the article

  • Function pointers uasage

    - by chaitanyavarma
    Hi All, Why these two codes give the same output, Case - 1: #include <stdio.h> typedef void (*mycall) (int a ,int b); void addme(int a,int b); void mulme(int a,int b); void subme(int a,int b); main() { mycall x[10]; x[0] = &addme; x[1] = &subme; x[2] = &mulme; (x[0])(5,2); (x[1])(5,2); (x[2])(5,2); } void addme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a+b)); } void mulme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a*b)); } void subme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a-b)); } Output: the value is 7 the value is 3 the value is 10 Case -2 : #include <stdio.h> typedef void (*mycall) (int a ,int b); void addme(int a,int b); void mulme(int a,int b); void subme(int a,int b); main() { mycall x[10]; x[0] = &addme; x[1] = &subme; x[2] = &mulme; (*x[0])(5,2); (*x[1])(5,2); (*x[2])(5,2); } void addme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a+b)); } void mulme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a*b)); } void subme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a-b)); } Output: the value is 7 the value is 3 the value is 10

    Read the article

  • Function pointers usage

    - by chaitanyavarma
    Hi All, Why these two codes give the same output, Case 1: #include <stdio.h> typedef void (*mycall) (int a ,int b); void addme(int a,int b); void mulme(int a,int b); void subme(int a,int b); main() { mycall x[10]; x[0] = &addme; x[1] = &subme; x[2] = &mulme; (x[0])(5,2); (x[1])(5,2); (x[2])(5,2); } void addme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a+b)); } void mulme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a*b)); } void subme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a-b)); } Output: the value is 7 the value is 3 the value is 10 Case 2 : #include <stdio.h> typedef void (*mycall) (int a ,int b); void addme(int a,int b); void mulme(int a,int b); void subme(int a,int b); main() { mycall x[10]; x[0] = &addme; x[1] = &subme; x[2] = &mulme; (*x[0])(5,2); (*x[1])(5,2); (*x[2])(5,2); } void addme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a+b)); } void mulme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a*b)); } void subme(int a, int b) { printf("the value is %d\n",(a-b)); } Output: the value is 7 the value is 3 the value is 10

    Read the article

  • Proper way to reassign pointers in c++

    - by user272689
    I want to make sure i have these basic ideas correct before moving on (I am coming from a Java/Python background). I have been searching the net, but haven't found a concrete answer to this question yet. When you reassign a pointer to a new object, do you have to call delete on the old object first to avoid a memory leak? My intuition is telling me yes, but i want a concrete answer before moving on. For example, let say you had a class that stored a pointer to a string class MyClass { private: std::string *str; public: MyClass (const std::string &_str) { str=new std::string(_str); } void ChangeString(const std::string &_str) { // I am wondering if this is correct? delete str; str = new std::string(_str) /* * or could you simply do it like: * str = _str; */ } .... In the ChangeString method, which would be correct? I think i am getting hung up on if you dont use the new keyword for the second way, it will still compile and run like you expected. Does this just overwrite the data that this pointer points to? Or does it do something else? Any advice would be greatly appricated :D

    Read the article

  • How does dereferencing of a function pointer happen?

    - by eSKay
    Why and how does dereferencing a function pointer just "do nothing"? This is what I am talking about: #include<stdio.h> void hello() { printf("hello"); } int main(void) { (*****hello)(); } From a comment over here: function pointers dereference just fine, but the resulting function designator will be immediately converted back to a function pointer And from an answer here: Dereferencing (in way you think) a function's pointer means: accessing a CODE memory as it would be a DATA memory. Function pointer isn't suppose to be dereferenced in that way. Instead, it is called. I would use a name "dereference" side by side with "call". It's OK. Anyway: C is designed in such a way that both function name identifier as well as variable holding function's pointer mean the same: address to CODE memory. And it allows to jump to that memory by using call () syntax either on an identifier or variable. How exactly does dereferencing of a function pointer work?

    Read the article

  • Double Free inside of a destructor upon adding to a vector

    - by Shawn B
    Hey, I am working on a drum machine, and am having problems with vectors. Each Sequence has a list of samples, and the samples are ordered in a vector. However, when a sample is push_back on the vector, the sample's destructor is called, and results in a double free error. Here is the Sample creation code: class XSample { public: Uint8 Repeat; Uint8 PlayCount; Uint16 Beats; Uint16 *Beat; Uint16 BeatsPerMinute; XSample(Uint16 NewBeats,Uint16 NewBPM,Uint8 NewRepeat); ~XSample(); void GenerateSample(); void PlaySample(); }; XSample::XSample(Uint16 NewBeats,Uint16 NewBPM,Uint8 NewRepeat) { Beats = NewBeats; BeatsPerMinute = NewBPM; Repeat = NewRepeat-1; PlayCount = 0; printf("XSample Construction\n"); Beat = new Uint16[Beats]; } XSample::~XSample() { printf("XSample Destruction\n"); delete [] Beat; } And the 'Dynamo' code that creates each sample in the vector: class XDynamo { public: std::vector<XSample> Samples; void CreateSample(Uint16 NewBeats,Uint16 NewBPM,Uint8 NewRepeat); }; void XDynamo::CreateSample(Uint16 NewBeats,Uint16 NewBPM,Uint8 NewRepeat) { Samples.push_back(XSample(NewBeats,NewBPM,NewRepeat)); } Here is main(): int main() { XDynamo Dynamo; Dynamo.CreateSample(4,120,2); Dynamo.CreateSample(8,240,1); return 0; } And this is what happens when the program is run: Starting program: /home/shawn/dynamo2/dynamo [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] XSample Construction XSample Destruction XSample Construction XSample Destruction *** glibc detected *** /home/shawn/dynamo2/dynamo: double free or corruption (fasttop): 0x0804d008 *** However, when the delete [] is removed from the destructor, the program runs perfectly. What is causing this? Any help is greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException double array size

    - by Andy
    I'm going to preface this question with this statement: I know that I can easily handle this problem by reading the amount of lines in a file and making an array that size. I am not allowed to do this. Anyway, here is my question. I need to double my array's size whenever my program encounters an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException and then copy all the previous read in information into the larger array. Here is my code public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException { Scanner inScan, fScan = null; int [] A = new int[5]; inScan = new Scanner(System.in); System.out.print("Please enter the file to read from: "); while(true) { try{ String fName = inScan.nextLine(); fScan = new Scanner(new File(fName)); break; } catch (FileNotFoundException ex) { System.out.println("Your file is invalid -- please re-enter"); } } String nextItem; int nextInt = 0; int i = 0; while (fScan.hasNextLine()) { try { nextItem = fScan.nextLine(); nextInt = Integer.parseInt(nextItem); A[i] = nextInt; i++; } catch (NumberFormatException e) { System.out.println("Found an invalid int -- ignored"); } catch (ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException e) { //double the size of array A until //copy all previous read in information to the larger array } } System.out.println("Here are your " + i + " items:"); for (int j = 0; j < i; j++) { System.out.println(A[j] + " "); } } }

    Read the article

  • C++ and function pointers assessment: lack of inspiration

    - by OlivierDofus
    I've got an assessment to give to my students. It's about C++ and function pointers. Their skill is middle: it the first year of a programming school after bachelor. To give you something precise, here's a sample of a solution of one of 3 exercices they had to do in 30 minutes (the question was: "here's a version of a code that could be written with function pointers, write down the same thing but with function pointers"): typedef void (*fcPtr) (istream &); fcPtr ArrayFct [] = { Delete , Insert, Swap, Move }; void HandleCmd (const string && Cmd) { string AvalaibleCommands ("DISM"); string::size_type Pos; istringstream Flux (Cmd); char CodeOp; Flux >> CodeOp; Pos = AvalaibleCommands.find (toupper (CodeOp)); if (Pos != string::npos) { ArrayFct [Pos](Flux); } } Any idea where I could find some inspiration? Some of the students have understood the principles, even though it's very hard for them to write C++ code. I know them, I know they're clever, and I'm pretty sure they should be very good project managers. So, writing C++ code is not that important after all. Understanding is the most important part (IMHO). I'm wondering about maybe break the habits, and give half of the questions about the principle, or even better, give some sample in other language and ask them why it's better to use function pointers instead of classical programming (usually a big switch case). Any idea where I could look? Find some inspiration?

    Read the article

  • What is the underlying reason for not being able to put arrays of pointers in unsafe structs in C#?

    - by cons
    If one could put an array of pointers to child structs inside unsafe structs in C# like one could in C, constructing complex data structures without the overhead of having one object per node would be a lot easier and less of a time sink, as well as syntactically cleaner and much more readable. Is there a deep architectural reason why fixed arrays inside unsafe structs are only allowed to be composed of "value types" and not pointers? I assume only having explicitly named pointers inside structs must be a deliberate decision to weaken the language, but I can't find any documentation about why this is so, or the reasoning for not allowing pointer arrays inside structs, since I would assume the garbage collector shouldn't care what is going on in structs marked as unsafe. Digital Mars' D handles structs and pointers elegantly in comparison, and I'm missing not being able to rapidly develop succinct data structures; by making references abstract in C# a lot of power seems to have been removed from the language, even though pointers are still there at least in a marketing sense. Maybe I'm wrong to expect languages to become more powerful at representing complex data structures efficiently over time.

    Read the article

  • Hotkey for double-click highlight?

    - by Steven Wright
    I'm working in Eclipse and find myself always replacing multiple copies of the same word, but I always have to take my hands off the keyboard and screen to get the mouse, hover over the word, double click to select, and then copy or rewrite the word. Is there any way I can just move the cursor inside the word and hit some hotkey that would highlight it? Seems like this would be a big timesaver. Or if there's a way to create a hotkey that would be perfect too.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >